Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dual wielding

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dragonus
    replied
    I think, for this to be balanced, there would need to be a significant penalty to one-handed weapon defense. I don't like the multi-hitter idea, too over powered. But I don't see any other option for it to be viable. Making each hit harder wouldn't really make sense if you have 2 weapons wielded.

    One problem with balance would be trying to explain why a weapon like say a cestus wouldn't have all multi-hitters when they are essentially already dual wielded.

    Also, for say a weapon like swords that can give up a shield and still have 2 full layers of defense. Then pick up another weapon and have access to even more multi-hitters.

    Additionally, this would be another strategic advantage for one-handed weapons while two-handed weapons are once again limited.

    Furthermore, we just got rid of this ability with swords. This would basically allow people to cherry-pick the best moves from 2 different skillsets if they do decide to pick up a different weapon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rupert
    replied
    Originally posted by lykatos View Post
    What happens when someone wants to stack two weapons that make them invincible? Like Nelsor + knives/CKF? Whips + Nelsor? Or Knives/CKF + Cestus? Nelsor + Cestus? Or clubs + anything?

    It's a cool idea, but there are lots of problems that could arise without a whole lot of penalties. The off hand weapon should only have half of the available RB per offensive move and 15% of the defense if anything. But even then you would still have some OP builds, unless you limit it to certain weapons and skills, we'll have the sword style issue all over again, except with more people asking for refunds.
    Styles have their own requirements, lets just throw out styles skills completely. That should fix all of those problems.
    The problem with giving the off-handed weapon half RB is there would be no reason to use the offensive moves. The problem with giving people less than what others receive from a third layer is you remove two weapons from competing at any kind of high tier level. I would think giving up a complete layer of defense in exchange for a few utility moves would be punishment enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • urek23
    replied
    I'd say somewhere between 50-75% rb w/both weapons.

    Leave a comment:


  • lykatos
    replied
    What happens when someone wants to stack two weapons that make them invincible? Like Nelsor + knives/CKF? Whips + Nelsor? Or Knives/CKF + Cestus? Nelsor + Cestus? Or clubs + anything?

    It's a cool idea, but there are lots of problems that could arise without a whole lot of penalties. The off hand weapon should only have half of the available RB per offensive move and 15% of the defense if anything. But even then you would still have some OP builds, unless you limit it to certain weapons and skills, we'll have the sword style issue all over again, except with more people asking for refunds.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rupert
    replied
    Originally posted by cbecker View Post
    I would love to see this, but I would think it would have to be D&D-esque. The primary weapon can be of any normal size, but any off-hand weapon should be of equal or lesser size. Also, the secondary weapon offensive rank bonus contributions shouldn't exceed a fraction (75%?) of the primary bonuses. I would imagine that no matter how good you are with a weapon, wielding two weapons is going to hinder your ability somewhat. (Maybe implement an ambidextrous trait to negate the penalty?) As far as timing goes, I could see some issues. Are you suggesting that if you attack with your primary, you won't be able to attack with your secondary until your first rt is up? So no simultaneous or 3/2 attacks? Otherwise I think you have some valid ideas that might be interesting to see.
    Round times would all be based off of your speed stat/stat skills. As an example, if you have inhuman speed you'll be 1+mos on knife jab, but 3+ mos for axe swat(?). So yes, you would have to finish an attack RT before moving on to the next.

    The real penalties come from giving up a shield layer, and with that a complete layer of defense. If I wanted to wield two knives for example, my only defensive layers would be CM's and knives, and the second knife would receive 33% of the overall RB from your knife blocks. Without a complete third layer though(Or any third layer), any build will suffer from defense penalties. The more offensive the build the more it suffers.

    The real offensive perks come from being able to use moves from two one handed skillsets. If I were wielding a knife and a whip, I could take advantage of knives double hitters AND whips grapples. But I would lose a shield layer, and because whips have no weapon blocks I would be confined to 100/50 knives/CM's for total defense available.

    The more I think about it, it really is just shield mechanics being applied to a weapon.
    Last edited by Rupert; 08-22-2013, 05:50 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • glenh
    replied
    Or just two hits with an increased roundtime?

    Stab man
    you stab at a man - puncture

    Stab man
    you stab at a man with both weapons - 2 punctures

    ? Sounds good in effect, but is a second weapon better than a shield? Will hoplite spearmen want to wield 2 spears?

    Leave a comment:


  • cbecker
    replied
    I would love to see this, but I would think it would have to be D&D-esque. The primary weapon can be of any normal size, but any off-hand weapon should be of equal or lesser size. Also, the secondary weapon offensive rank bonus contributions shouldn't exceed a fraction (75%?) of the primary bonuses. I would imagine that no matter how good you are with a weapon, wielding two weapons is going to hinder your ability somewhat. (Maybe implement an ambidextrous trait to negate the penalty?) As far as timing goes, I could see some issues. Are you suggesting that if you attack with your primary, you won't be able to attack with your secondary until your first rt is up? So no simultaneous or 3/2 attacks? Otherwise I think you have some valid ideas that might be interesting to see.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rupert
    replied
    I think something like this would be of great benefit to all one handed weapons. If you're using two of the same weapon, all it does is give you your weapon blocks at an additional 33%, and at a reasonable SP cost compared to taking on shields. You're giving up that complete third layer of defense, though.

    For the top tiers, there's combinations of weapons for strategy. Any combination of Axe, knife, gladius, whip, and club. You COULD open it up to one handed attacks with two handed weapons as well, maybe make it a different combat maneuver. Combat maneuvers would be the universal third skillset shared for the most part, and with the RP cost hike in skill slots smaller builds seem to be the way to go.

    And I can't speak from experience, but it seems like it would be code similar to how shields work. You wield a shield in the opposite hand, and you can attack with it. It can be that far off in the code for a weapon to function with the same properties.


    With the combat changes slowing down now though, I see this being a bit off in the future if ever.

    Leave a comment:


  • SiriusLee
    replied
    Dual Wielding

    This sounds like it would be amazing! and the way you presented it sounds balanced also. However, I would make it a passive skill to swap weapon contents with a chance to fumble or drop 1 or both weapons in the process. Lets face it. Swapping weapons from hand to hand mid fight wouldn't be easy and could look really fancy.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X